Academies policy turned on its head

For a school to achieve "outstanding" status, there presumably has to be something outstanding about the way it is run (Coalition's schools plan to create 2,000 more academies, 25 May). The coalition now proposes to "fix" what is so categorically not broken by converting such schools to academies. In doing so, it will place them under the control of sponsor-heavy governing bodies, thus ensuring that any other voices can always be outvoted, and removing democratic accountability through local authorities.

At the same time, it proposes to take money from the education mainstream and invest it in ideologically driven flagship "free" schools run by whom, exactly? Jostling for position at the head of the queue are likely to be religious organisations eager to bring more children under their influence, maverick individuals with a religious axe to grind or a bloated ego to nourish, and for-profit organisations keen to, well, make a profit, even if that means economising on facilities for pupils and insinuating advertising into the classroom.

The coalition's schools policy threatens the fabric of our education system. I urge those in a position to make the argument against it in the public arena to find their voices before it's too late.

Mike Lim

Bolton, Lancashire

• Whatever view you took of New Labour's academies programme, it was intended as a social justice measure, targeting schools where "everything else had failed". The coalition's expansion of academies is of an entirely different nature. It offers "outstanding" primary and secondary schools the opportunity to opt out of their local family schools. This will divide the education system into the "best and the rest". Academies will be structurally elitist, and possibly financially better off. Add in to this equation a growth of new "parent-led" schools and you create a sharply divided, socially segregated system.

Michael Gove claims he wants to tackle the underachievement in our schools. He should look more closely at the evidence of what works rather than peddling, like a mountebank, fake school improvement lotions and potions.

Alasdair Smith

National secretary, Anti Academies Alliance

• The debate about proposals for free schools and a massive extension of the academies programme is being grossly distorted by the constant repetition that the policies are designed "to take schools out council control". Councils do not control schools, nor have they for many years. Their role is to advise and support schools, oversee standards and admissions policies, plan and deliver building programmes (now under threat). They also work closely with schools on policies to alleviate child poverty, child protection, recreation and skills. The irony implicit in the coalition's proposals is that central, not local, government will assume ever greater responsibility for schools in England.

Cllr Jeremy Beecham

Leader, LGA Labour Group

• As a single person with no children, I have paid disproportionately more in taxes than parents, whether married or not. As a member of my local community, I have a vested interest in ensuring a successful education system. However, the Con Dems have decided that, although I will continue to pay for the privilege of a fractured system in which anyone can open a school, I am to be denied any way of opposing plans in a democratic way. Should Cameron's Big Society be redefined as High Society?

Jane Eades

London

• In most American cities the majority of pupils are either educated privately or in state-funded but "independent" charter schools. That leaves the state sector with a higher proportion of children who are more difficult to educate – those with special needs, the disaffected and the poor. Charter schools actually began as a radical idea to give parents more influence over the curriculum. It was appropriated by the libertarian right and it became a Trojan horse for the business takeover – most charter schools are now run by private companies.